Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Hello,
I noticed that some of the Jap destroyer classes, lose some of the main armament in the process of upgrading while gaining some more AA and ASW capability. I have a few questions regarding that:
1. Is the loss of 2 of 12,7cm guns noticeable in combat? Or are the main guns overrated anyway and torps matter most? So far in DD vs DD combat the guns have been helpful but will it matter later on against Fletchers?
2. Is it worth not to upgrade them and keep the guns at the cost of lower AA/ASW capability if one intends to keep using them for surface combat?
3. Do you upgrade but just switch them to other roles, let's say exclusively as Carier or other TF escorts and use only some DD classes for SAGs?
4. Do you upgrade and keep using them in SAGs because guns don't really matter and they're there as screening ships and torpedo boats only anyway?
Thanks in advance!
I noticed that some of the Jap destroyer classes, lose some of the main armament in the process of upgrading while gaining some more AA and ASW capability. I have a few questions regarding that:
1. Is the loss of 2 of 12,7cm guns noticeable in combat? Or are the main guns overrated anyway and torps matter most? So far in DD vs DD combat the guns have been helpful but will it matter later on against Fletchers?
2. Is it worth not to upgrade them and keep the guns at the cost of lower AA/ASW capability if one intends to keep using them for surface combat?
3. Do you upgrade but just switch them to other roles, let's say exclusively as Carier or other TF escorts and use only some DD classes for SAGs?
4. Do you upgrade and keep using them in SAGs because guns don't really matter and they're there as screening ships and torpedo boats only anyway?
Thanks in advance!
- Jorge_Stanbury
- Posts: 4345
- Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
- Location: Montreal
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Surface combat will be fun for the Japanese player during the first year of war; against obsolete cruisers, 4-stack DDs, etc. It will become painful afterwards.
The probabilities of hitting a DD with torpedoes is small, DD vs DD combat usually happen with guns. The Fletchers are vastly superior regarless of the numbers of guns... To put it in perspective, a pack of Fletchers can take down a Japanese CA...
Surface combat will become less important with time, so IMHO it is worth upgrading to improve AA/ ASW
The probabilities of hitting a DD with torpedoes is small, DD vs DD combat usually happen with guns. The Fletchers are vastly superior regarless of the numbers of guns... To put it in perspective, a pack of Fletchers can take down a Japanese CA...
Surface combat will become less important with time, so IMHO it is worth upgrading to improve AA/ ASW
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
I think this happens on the smaller boats rather than the bigger ones. The smaller ones simply don't have room for the DCs and AA in addition to the main armament. IIRC, the newer and bigger boats keep their main armament throughout their AA/ASW upgrades.
That said... look at where they're positioned. Guns positioned in the center ("C") fire much less often than guns on the rear ("R"), which seem to fire much less often than those on the front-facing mountings ("F"). So if you're losing out on C- or R-mounted guns, consider that.
Also consider what job you want them to perform. If they're going to be doing AA duty at all, you should upgrade them.
That said... look at where they're positioned. Guns positioned in the center ("C") fire much less often than guns on the rear ("R"), which seem to fire much less often than those on the front-facing mountings ("F"). So if you're losing out on C- or R-mounted guns, consider that.
Also consider what job you want them to perform. If they're going to be doing AA duty at all, you should upgrade them.
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Not just room, but weight is a factor. Any new equipment above the waterline makes the ship less stable. The Faragut class destroyers were too small for all the equipment added during the war. Two were lost in a typhoon in large part because they were too top heavy.
Many Fletchers lost one of their 5 inch guns for a 40mm platform. Late war a lot of Fletchers lost one or both torpedo tube sets for more AA, so it wasn't just a Japanese destroyer phenomenon. The Fletchers were bigger than most other DDs at the time, so they could take on more equipment before they became too top heavy. Larger ships could take on a lot more AA without losing anything because they had some much mass below the waterline to begin with.
Even at that there was some concern about the added weight along the edges of decks on the carriers. Not long after the war the carriers that weren't retired started losing AA mounts as the USN tried to make the ships more stable. The Yorktown class was the only CV class that didn't get the twin 5 inc mounts around the island because of the weight of the turrets. It was simply too much top side weight.
Bill
Many Fletchers lost one of their 5 inch guns for a 40mm platform. Late war a lot of Fletchers lost one or both torpedo tube sets for more AA, so it wasn't just a Japanese destroyer phenomenon. The Fletchers were bigger than most other DDs at the time, so they could take on more equipment before they became too top heavy. Larger ships could take on a lot more AA without losing anything because they had some much mass below the waterline to begin with.
Even at that there was some concern about the added weight along the edges of decks on the carriers. Not long after the war the carriers that weren't retired started losing AA mounts as the USN tried to make the ships more stable. The Yorktown class was the only CV class that didn't get the twin 5 inc mounts around the island because of the weight of the turrets. It was simply too much top side weight.
Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Also keep in mind the Porter class upgrades. This class started the war with 4 x twin 5/38 mounts, 2 x fore and 2 x aft. Later in the war the third (aft) mount was replaced by 40mm AA. All these upgrades reflected wartime realities not visualized by ship designers pre-war.
Rangers Lead The Way!
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Since DP guns on destroyers are handy in disrupting air attacks, I would look into those late war upgrades that replace DP guns of 8cm - 12.7cm caliber with 25mm guns and decide if the upgrade is not really a downgrade.
tm.asp?m=3563689&mpage=1&key=�
tm.asp?m=3563689&mpage=1&key=�
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Thanks for the input guys, I really appreciate it
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Endy
Hello,
I noticed that some of the Jap destroyer classes, lose some of the main armament in the process of upgrading while gaining some more AA and ASW capability. I have a few questions regarding that:
1. Is the loss of 2 of 12,7cm guns noticeable in combat? Or are the main guns overrated anyway and torps matter most? So far in DD vs DD combat the guns have been helpful but will it matter later on against Fletchers?
2. Is it worth not to upgrade them and keep the guns at the cost of lower AA/ASW capability if one intends to keep using them for surface combat?
3. Do you upgrade but just switch them to other roles, let's say exclusively as Carier or other TF escorts and use only some DD classes for SAGs?
4. Do you upgrade and keep using them in SAGs because guns don't really matter and they're there as screening ships and torpedo boats only anyway?
IMO especially ASW upgrades are important. Loosing some of the 12,7 mm guns are irritating and it inevitably those ships have less firepower, but at that point of the game Japan should usually avoid surface actions anyway.
One thing to note: When destroyers loose one turret, they usually get surface radar. In theory that should help in surface combat (earlier detection of enemy).
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Two things to add regarding Jap DD upgrades:
1) A lot of the older classes can upgrade in 2/42, such as the Minekaze and Kamikaze class. However this upgrade usually robs them of most of their TTs and a couple of 4.7" DP guns in return for slightly more AA guns. I prefer to keep them as they are until the last available upgrade in 4/44 when they get decent DCs.
2) Most late (usually the last) upgrades of the better Jap DDs mean they lose their reloads for the TTs, I prefer to keep them as they are their best weapon.
1) A lot of the older classes can upgrade in 2/42, such as the Minekaze and Kamikaze class. However this upgrade usually robs them of most of their TTs and a couple of 4.7" DP guns in return for slightly more AA guns. I prefer to keep them as they are until the last available upgrade in 4/44 when they get decent DCs.
2) Most late (usually the last) upgrades of the better Jap DDs mean they lose their reloads for the TTs, I prefer to keep them as they are their best weapon.
- Louisvillan
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 1:24 pm
- Location: Louisville
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Great thread and I'd like to start by agreeing with the feedback.
I think the Anti Air Craft ratings for destroyers with Single Purpose guns is over stated in 1941-1942. With all the details and research gone into WITP-AE, I'm sure the designers would have known how weak these ships were historically in defending themselves against air attack, let alone contributing to Task Force air defense.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is a smart move, that increases game play, especially for Japanese players. I'm just curious if others have noticed this detail.
Example the US Porter Class were Destroyer leaders equipped with four twin Single Purpose 5" gun mounts. Yet they start the game in Dec 41 with a great AA Rating.... Of course, in '42 I will always seek out those destroyers for my Carrier Task Forces specifically because of that AA Rating.
Just a thought
I think the Anti Air Craft ratings for destroyers with Single Purpose guns is over stated in 1941-1942. With all the details and research gone into WITP-AE, I'm sure the designers would have known how weak these ships were historically in defending themselves against air attack, let alone contributing to Task Force air defense.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is a smart move, that increases game play, especially for Japanese players. I'm just curious if others have noticed this detail.
Example the US Porter Class were Destroyer leaders equipped with four twin Single Purpose 5" gun mounts. Yet they start the game in Dec 41 with a great AA Rating.... Of course, in '42 I will always seek out those destroyers for my Carrier Task Forces specifically because of that AA Rating.
Just a thought
Fair Winds and Following Seas
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Louisvillan
Great thread and I'd like to start by agreeing with the feedback.
I think the Anti Air Craft ratings for destroyers with Single Purpose guns is over stated in 1941-1942. With all the details and research gone into WITP-AE, I'm sure the designers would have known how weak these ships were historically in defending themselves against air attack, let alone contributing to Task Force air defense.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is a smart move, that increases game play, especially for Japanese players. I'm just curious if others have noticed this detail.
Example the US Porter Class were Destroyer leaders equipped with four twin Single Purpose 5" gun mounts. Yet they start the game in Dec 41 with a great AA Rating.... Of course, in '42 I will always seek out those destroyers for my Carrier Task Forces specifically because of that AA Rating.
Just a thought
You are misreading what the AA rating means.
The AA rating number is just a bit more meaningful than the ASW rating.
Alfred
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Alfred
You are misreading what the AA rating means.
The AA rating number is just a bit more meaningful than the ASW rating.
Alfred
Hey Alfred,
do you mean to say that rather than looking at AA rating as the most important factor it's much better to look at what weapons the ship has, with what ranges, ceiling etc. And that the rating itself is a bit of an abstraction, not necessarily telling you how effective the AA will be? As an example in the other discussion Jap 25 mm guns were mentioned, which, while giving you a much better AA rating, are not really very effective.
This is sort of in line with what the other guys are saying and with the discussion about AA guns that Yaab linked, just wanted to confirm this.
-
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 12:16 am
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
I think the AA rating is a combined "value" for all AA weapons. But many AA weapons are so short ranged that they can only protect the ship but still yield high AA values, especially if they are very good at very close ranges.
For most applications we are interested in those AAA devices that have the range to protect Carriers from enemy air attacks. One cannot determine from the AA value of the ship whether or not it can effectively provide covering fire for other capital ships.
For most applications we are interested in those AAA devices that have the range to protect Carriers from enemy air attacks. One cannot determine from the AA value of the ship whether or not it can effectively provide covering fire for other capital ships.
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Endy
ORIGINAL: Alfred
You are misreading what the AA rating means.
The AA rating number is just a bit more meaningful than the ASW rating.
Alfred
Hey Alfred,
do you mean to say that rather than looking at AA rating as the most important factor it's much better to look at what weapons the ship has, with what ranges, ceiling etc. And that the rating itself is a bit of an abstraction, not necessarily telling you how effective the AA will be? As an example in the other discussion Jap 25 mm guns were mentioned, which, while giving you a much better AA rating, are not really very effective.
This is sort of in line with what the other guys are saying and with the discussion about AA guns that Yaab linked, just wanted to confirm this.
Correct.
Far too many come to the forum with their own predetermined conclusions as to how the game is coded, or should be played or whatever. They then proceed to engage in the most superficial analysis of the various game elements. Then they become "experienced" in playing the game but again still subject to their predetermined conclusions arrived at from reading third hand unreliable accounts.
Any proper analysis requires a close attention to the detail contained in the game itself, not what one thinks it should be. It then needs to understand the game context, again not some predetermined context which is largely irrelevant anyway.
In practical game terms a ship whose entire AA is provided by 200x40mm Bofors, has zero anti-air defence capability if it is going to be attacked by enemy aircraft flying at 13k. But a ship with a single 5" DP as it's entire anti-air weapon system, does have some anti-air defence capability. Yet it is the former ship which has the better AA rating by far. Conversely, sent the same two ships into an area where only enemy torpedo bombers operate, the Bofors equipped ship has by far the superior anti-air weapon system.
Alfred
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
Very interesting thread.
All us, JFBs, should devote move time studying the japanese DDs upgrade paths... What Miller has just said was an eyeopener for me!
All us, JFBs, should devote move time studying the japanese DDs upgrade paths... What Miller has just said was an eyeopener for me!
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
There are quite a few questionable upgrades for Japan. The biggest one that comes to mind is AA rocket upgrade for carriers...of course you need to still have carriers by the time that upgrade becomes available.
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
There are quite a few questionable upgrades for Japan. The biggest one that comes to mind is AA rocket upgrade for carriers...of course you need to still have carriers by the time that upgrade becomes available.
And I think the devs have said they are useless in the game, so no point in doing it.
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Miller
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
There are quite a few questionable upgrades for Japan. The biggest one that comes to mind is AA rocket upgrade for carriers...of course you need to still have carriers by the time that upgrade becomes available.
And I think the devs have said they are useless in the game, so no point in doing it.
That's news to me. Why are they useless? Their stats aren't that bad.
-
- Posts: 3394
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:59 am
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Miller
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
There are quite a few questionable upgrades for Japan. The biggest one that comes to mind is AA rocket upgrade for carriers...of course you need to still have carriers by the time that upgrade becomes available.
And I think the devs have said they are useless in the game, so no point in doing it.
That's news to me. Why are they useless? Their stats aren't that bad.
The thread in question - tm.asp?m=2811663
Note post #12 from JWE.
RE: Question about Jap destroyer upgrades
In game terms I remember reading that the larger cal weapons fired twice. Once before the attack was initiated. Now I could be wrong... memory isn't what it was. Can someone confirm?
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume
In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche
Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche
Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb